(no subject)

[pozorvlak]

My paper was rejected. Not enough new material, and I'd failed to cite related work.

As well as being annoying, this is worrying: the paper contained almost all the new material that's in my thesis, strongly suggesting that my thesis doesn't contain enough new material either.

Bugger.

On the upside, the reviewer suggested some possible applications and further work: if I could do that, maybe that would be enough.

Comments

[michiexile]

Doh. Referee reports seem to me to be almost exclusively heart-rate boosting reading regardless of what they say. I remember my own annoyance at my own paper this December, when the referee said things like "The entire section 4 is well-known and should be cut down in size" - where section 4 was, basically, my own original results.

Listen to the academics already commenting here. And remember, if your advisor thinks it's good enough, and your external examiners think it's good enought, it's a thesis. The referee judged your paper in relation to that journal - it might get a completely different reception at another journal.

Or for that matter with another referee.

Go at 'em, boy-o!